The Cambridge History of India, Vol. III: Turks and Afghans v3.c28.65

v3.c28.65

¹ The founders of the dynasties seem seldom, if ever, to have used the royal title. The Portuguese did not accord it to Yūsuf ‘Ādil Khān, or to his son Ismā‘īl; Sultān Qulī Qutb-ul-Mulk, who became independent in Telingāna in 1512, never used it, as is evident from the epitaph on his tomb. Ahmad could hardly have borne it, for if his courtiers had been accustomed to it they would not have murmured at his using an umbrella, and if these three did not assume it it is certain that Fathullāh did not. They were, however, in all respects independent, though they sometimes, when it suited their policy and convenience, took the field with the puppet king of Bīdar, or rather with his guardian, and their successors used the title of Shāh. Burhān I of Ahmadnagar was rebuked by Bahādur of Gujarāt, who afterwards recognised it, for using it, and it was never recognised by the Mughul emperors, who always addressed the rulers of Bījāpur, Ahmadnagar, and Golconda as *‘Ādil Khān*, *Nizām-ul-Mulk*, and *Qutb-ul-Mulk*.